W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > June 2012

Re: mapping the conceptual space (was Restarting W3C eGov)

From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 18:57:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMXe=Spa2TgK++T-ni1hE_GWOBGq+2PDZRNRci9c_h0ncpTFHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Cc: "eGov IG (Public)" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>

add to roadmap (perhaps) :

- maintain a list of egov modelling challenges /issues, with cases

-  work toward a generic model for egov - some upper domain/top level
categories would be a great achievement
(seems like language is an important category there)

Also remember the lessons from objects: loose coupling , high cohesion


On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes, lots of mapping to do.
> About Locations
> ============
> The success criterion for the search of a Class (as a URI) representing a
> territorial subdivision is not Zero or more names, it's One or more names.
> A Class with exactly Zero members is a forward-looking illusion, but an
> illusion nonetheless.  The meaning of the table is something like ... If you
> are an eGov providing a service to your part of Spain, then the Service
> Providers' coverage map must at minimum include these other places.
> Redundancy is fine, but exclusion of 'inconvenient markets' is not
> acceptable in an eGov context.  Tenerife needs a fresh water supply and
> other public services just as Barcelona.  This is a fundamental difference
> from the Private Sector where the "coverage map" is drawn as {Barcelona} +
> {everywhere else}.   It boils down to two rules 1) don't make up Classes
> with Zero members and 2) don't group existing Classes - they are all islands
> in a federal system. Counties in some US States
> http://www.rustprivacy.org/2012/cctld/maps.pdf
> I believe this conceptual blind spot came about when Alexander the Great
> wandered into India and said "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help
> you".  May have been earlier.
> About Language
> ============
> The US Library of Congress is the ISO Language maintainer.  Apparently they
> think I read directions.  There are two distinct Code Classes, Terminology
> (2 character) and Bibliographic (three character).  These are not
> interchangeable from an eGov perspective.  For example the main web site for
> Canada is bilingual (english and french).  Only Quebec is french speaking,
> the other Provinces and Territories are english speaking.  If you "create" a
> french speaking Alberta then both Quebec and Alberta lose specificity, but
> something even stranger happens ... suddenly half of Saint Martin in the
> Caribbean has a relation to Canada and Canada has a relation to the
> Netherlands (the other half- Sint Maarten).  Point is, the inherited
> Interlingua is of marginal value at the top of the tree and declining value
> further down.  Although I only listed the inherited Interlingua, each place
> has a similar Bibliograph property list which can be fine tuned to local
> sensibilities (eg Castilian or Catalan instead of a generic "Spanish") if
> desired or necessary.  Even more mapping to do :o)  OTOH, this is mapping
> you do not want the EU or Google to be doing.
> --Gannon
> ________________________________
> From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
> To: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
> Cc: eGov IG (Public) <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 10:29 AM
> Subject: mapping the conceptual space (was Restarting W3C eGov)
> Gannon
> thank you
> glad you appreciate the problem, and surely there are many more layers
> of complexity that would benefit from being identified, so that we can
> start looking at each issue we tackle with a sense of perspective of
> eGov  as whole.
> The local dimension is important because thats where everything happen
> 'de facto'.  I have been mapping the gap between what happens at local
> level (and what information becomes publicly available about it) in
> various regions vs what is reported about the local level at global
> level or the corresponding authority, and often there are different
> stories....(will get back to valerie on separate email
> It very much depends on what one is looking at, what method is being
> used, what datasets are used, what words and concepts are used  etc.
> Lots to map!
> I look at the table you kindly populated here (thank you btw)
> http://www.rustprivacy.org/2012/cctld/psp/find-es.xhtml
> and wonder what I should do with it - I mean, how to use it?
> :-)
> I observer from example, that from initial visual inspection, it looks
> like all the colums have exactly the same values , except for 'Named'.
>   relationally speaking, this table contains redundant data, but not
> sure
> how you plan to use it.
> Or maybe we should expect the values in the respective columns to grow
> and develop into a different uri for each?
> also, the interlingua colum seems to contain a mapping between two
> vocabs,en and sp is that so?
> but in reality, the vocabulary mapping challenge is beyond straight
> translation from language a to language b
> perhaps, this colump contains a pointer to possible future ad hoc
> vocabularies and conceptual mappings
> also, from what i observe, no single data set actually reflects
> 'reality'  it would be good to include pointers also to non
> governmental data sets, where available, for example independent
> research, surveys carried out by the citizens (working on that as we
> speak) and other types of evidence that may enrich, and sometimes even
> contradict, the data in official datas
> lots of layers of complexity that could be mapped before crunching datasets
> best
> Monalisa :-)
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Jeanne:  caffeine defficiency, sorry ... you mean today in an hours or so
>> ?
>> Paola: Where the "locals" fit in eGov is indeed a problem because they use
>> identical nomenclature of existing Federal Governments but are "Domain
>> Sovereigns".  So, I came up with the concept of Public and Private Spaces
>> to
>> deal with the URI search schemes - always done on Public Spaces.  Somebody
>> maintains (public) Cultural Heritage sites and  those islands in the
>> commercial landscape should not be ignored.  The Top Level Domain
>> organizations do not imply governance: there is no google.eu nor is there
>> an
>> eu.google.  In this scheme, organizations of global reach are all the sum
>> (a
>> list) of a group of "Domain Sovereigns".  Regards language, I list an
>> "Interlingua" list of display languages available on the eGov website.
>> This
>> is different from the bibliograph, a list of bibliographic languages used
>> for legislation etc.
>> I added Spain for you.  The last table on the page should be of interest.
>> There is a link given for most countries of the world.
>> http://www.rustprivacy.org/2012/cctld/psp/
>> --Gannon
>> ________________________________
>> From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
>> To: "Holm, Jeanne M (1760)" <jeanne.m.holm@jpl.nasa.gov>
>> Cc: eGov IG (Public) <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
>> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 6:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: Restarting W3C eGov Meetings and Roadmap
>> Jane and all
>> additional thought:
>> I presume the work being done here is intended to be of global reach,
>> ie,applicable in principle to any country
>> Having studied how egov knowledge domain is developing worldwide (the
>> scope of W3C), I notice two easily identifiable poles:
>> 1. local jurisdictions/legislation .  national /regional boundaries
>> seem to shape what is happening in egov
>> for example, EU vs USA etc. But there are subregions, EU is not an
>> even landscape, and presume the USA is not either. From a research
>> viewpoint, may be interesting to map these jurisdictions.I am
>> currently in Spain and the public administration I have spoken so far
>> have never heard of eGovernment.. I wonder what is happening in other
>> parts of the world.
>> 2. language/information channels -  the majority of work in PA is done
>> in the local language, there seems to be a lot of asymmetry between
>> the lexical /conceptual heritage
>> in egov knowlege domain, depending i what language one is working,
>> also different knowledge sets.
>> A suggestion here may be that an egov shared vocab if adopted, should
>> be translated also in local languages, therefore, would be nice to
>> have local representatives from each jurisdiction participate in this
>> WG
>> cheers
>> PDM
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Dear Jeanne
>>> thanks for the update
>>> good to see a plan ahead, I ll aim to contribute when possible to this
>>> interesting work
>>> Skimmed through your mail and links, Just a couple of points:
>>>> First, we will be resuming the meetings for the W3C eGov Interest Group.
>>>> Based on your responses to the survey, we will have a meeting every two
>>>> weeks, with differing times to best reach your time zones:
>>> what survey? - could find no link or is it an older one?
>>>> We have published the draft roadmap document to the wiki
>>>> at http://www.w3.org/egov/wiki. We welcome your comments and
>>>> suggestions.
>>> 1. the link to definition, does not redirect to a definition , as far
>>> as I can see at my end
>>> (but good that there is a plan to evaluate the definition)
>>> 2. Any meaningful discussion, for example to address mechanics and
>>> value proposition
>>> is constrained (ontologically) by the definitions adopted, therefore I
>>> must insist on the suggestion that we need to agree with a definition
>>> first, and the definition should be
>>> 'valid'  and functional to the purpose of e-government in the true sense.
>>> 3. define some general vocabulary. Again, this is a recurring thing,
>>> but the terminology/concepts that we adopt are likely to shape
>>> discourse. for example, not just the definition of egov.
>>> For example, I do not object to the word  'citizenry' , but I wonder
>>> if we all use it in the same way. In the light of
>>> modern and democratic constitutions that eGov emanates from (from what
>>> I understand)  citizens are sovereign , therefore citizenry can be a
>>> synonym of sovereignty Is this what is intended as 'citizenry' in the
>>> charter
>>> A bit nitpicking perhaps, but thats what i understand you are
>>> soliciting as feedback,
>>> Thank you, best
>>> PDM
Received on Friday, 22 June 2012 17:57:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:43:22 UTC